Don't let the inertia of success "lock in" the future.

You may have had experiences like these: After getting used to a certain navigation app, even if it occasionally takes a longer route, you won't have the idea of trying a new navigation tool; when writing a report, you always can't help but use the template from previous years, even though this year's requirements and experiences are already different; when consuming, you always choose brands you're familiar with, whether you've used them or just heard of them, and generally won't easily try unfamiliar brands. These "habitual choices" in life essentially stem from our dependence on "past experiences."

For entrepreneurs, such "habits" sometimes mean danger. The tricks that once helped you overcome challenges will turn into hidden dependencies in the next cycle. Indicators, processes, and intuitions are all quietly pulling you back to the familiar track. Although successful experiences are valuable for reference, they can also sometimes hold you back and prevent you from breaking through yourself and innovating bravely. Just like a highly skilled painter, when he becomes overly proficient in a certain painting technique, he may actually lose the courage and ability to try new styles.

Do you know?

The "QWERTY" layout of the current computer keyboard was originally designed to avoid key jams on typewriters, and in fact, it's not very efficient. Later, someone invented the more efficient "DVORAK" layout, which can increase typing speed by more than 30%, but it has never been widely adopted because most people are already used to the QWERTY layout, and learning the new layout requires time and cost, and enterprises are also reluctant to produce keyboards with the new layout.

Another similar example is that there are actually video formats that are clearer and smaller in size than MP4 (such as MKV, AV1), but both video platforms, players, and ordinary users still prefer to use the MP4 format. Because MP4 was widely popularized in the early days and is supported by almost all devices, while the new formats require device compatibility and user learning, and people don't want to "bother."

Past choices or experiences have brought convenience, success, or a sense of security, forming a habit of "following without thinking." But when the environment, needs, and technology change, this habit can sometimes turn from a "help" into a "hindrance," making it difficult for people to adapt to new changes. This is the most hidden aspect of path dependence: it's not a "mistake," but rather that we treat past experiences as a "fixed track" rather than a "reference coordinate," limiting "future possibilities."

In the business wave, we often see such stories: Once glorious enterprises fall into difficulties when facing the impact of new technologies and new markets.

For example, when the era of smartphones arrived, Nokia was overly dependent on the successful experiences and technological paths it had accumulated in the traditional mobile phone field and failed to transform in time. Eventually, it missed the development opportunities in the smartphone market and declined from a leader in the industry to a follower.

Another example is Kodak. As a giant in the film industry, when digital technology emerged, due to its dependence on the success of its traditional film business, it didn't vigorously develop its digital business for a long time and eventually declined.

It's not just that enterprises have difficulty transforming due to their dependence on old business models. There are also managers who use outdated incentive mechanisms to manage the new generation, and brands that use the logic of the previous generation to guess the new consumer groups...

Behind these cases, there are two common traps in life - path dependence and success dependence. This kind of habit is an advantage in a stable environment, but in the rapidly changing business world, if we can't timely distinguish what is "outdated," it may become a weakness - especially for entrepreneurs. If they can't get rid of them, it will lock their thinking and hinder the development of the enterprise.

"Overfitting" on the entrepreneurial path

In machine learning, there is a concept called "Overfitting," which describes a phenomenon where learning too well actually leads to failure: The model performs perfectly on the training set but fails miserably on new data. Because it doesn't learn the general rules but rather remembers the details and noise of the past data. When learning, it takes care of every point, and even the noise in the data is learned as a rule. As a result, once the question type changes slightly, it can't handle it because what it has learned is not the principle but just memorized the answers.

Path dependence and success dependence are actually a kind of cognitive overfitting: We train too "well" on familiar problems, but what we improve is not the understanding of the underlying rules but specific practices or processes. The result is that when the question type changes, the system is reconstructed, and the variables are updated, the original framework is no longer applicable, but the brain still mindlessly applies the old answers.

Why are we prone to fall into "path dependence"?

From an economic perspective, the formation of path dependence mainly stems from two aspects:

One is increasing returns. That is, after an enterprise achieves success by adopting a certain strategy or model, it will continuously increase its investment in it, thereby obtaining more benefits. This positive feedback mechanism makes the enterprise more dependent on the original path.

The other is the transfer cost, including economic cost, psychological cost, and organizational cost. When an enterprise changes its original path, it needs to invest a large amount of resources in relearning, adjusting the organizational structure, and business processes. These costs make the enterprise hesitant to make changes.

From a cognitive science perspective, it's because our brains are actually far less open than we think. The theory of "predictive coding" holds that the brain doesn't understand reality openly but rather predicts what the world will look like based on experience and then uses the senses to verify the guess. As long as the reality doesn't obviously violate the prediction, we will default that the prediction is correct. That is to say, what we see is often not the reality itself but the reality processed by personal cognition and experience. Over time, we will not only increasingly believe in our own experience but also subconsciously shield the evidence that may shake it.

In addition, when we achieve success using a certain method, we will subconsciously attribute the credit to the method itself, but ignore a key fact: It's the match between the method and the scenario that makes it effective. Just like attributing the sweetness of a cake only to the recipe but forgetting the key role of "scenario conditions" such as the oven temperature and the freshness of the ingredients. Moreover, when the external scenario quietly changes - such as a shift in market demand or an iteration of user habits - most people rarely question "whether the method is outdated" at the first moment. Instead, they will fall into self - doubt: Did I not execute it carefully enough? Did I miss something in a certain link?

Especially, if a person is overly dependent on immediate feedback and pursues certainty, they can only feel a sense of control when the task is clear and the path is familiar, and they dare not take a step once the boundaries are blurred. Then when facing complex new problems, they may be more inclined to find reference answers from the past rather than build a new model.

The hard - to - escape "local optimum"

Let's start with a common scenario: You go to the mall to buy clothes on the weekend. The first shirt you try on fits well and is reasonably priced. Although you vaguely feel that there may be a more suitable style for you, thinking that "it will be a waste of time to keep looking, and this one is already good enough," you pay for it decisively. But when you go home and see the clothing recommendations from other stores in the mall, you find that there is a shirt that not only suits your style better but also has a higher cost - performance ratio. This is a typical "local optimum": When making decisions, we are easily attracted by the currently visible and optimal choice in front of us but ignore the better results that may be obtained through further exploration.

Another scenario is climbing a mountain. Your goal is to reach the highest peak. You keep walking uphill at every step. At first, everything goes smoothly, and the view gradually broadens, so you think you're getting closer to the goal. Until one moment, you stand on a mountaintop - only to find that the real peak is actually "hidden" on the other side of the valley. Although every step you took was correct, there is no way forward.

This kind of "local optimum" thinking is particularly common in personal growth and entrepreneurship. Many times, the "stability" and "feasibility" we hold on to are actually just the optimal within a local scope. In a complex and non - linear system, because we don't consider the overall path structure, don't allow for temporary setbacks, and don't have or consider the ability to explore distant peaks, it eventually becomes a shackle that prevents us from breaking through. We get stuck at the local optimum and can't break free.

The same is true in real life: If you're very good at your entry - level job, you may be reluctant to spend time learning new skills or challenging more difficult positions. When there is a technological innovation in the industry, you may find it difficult to transform due to lack of accumulation. When exploring a new career direction, if we always choose the positions that are easiest to switch to, we can only stay in the familiar field... The more afraid we are of taking detours, the easier it is to get stuck on a seemingly good small hill.

Of course, we never deny the value of "what we're good at" - the experiences that once helped you break through difficulties and the abilities that allowed you to gain a foothold are the most solid foundation on the entrepreneurial path. But the danger lies not in "being good at" itself but in turning "being good at" into the "only option."

The worst result of the thinking of "path dependence" and "local optimum" is structural lock - in. Just like once a river forms a channel, the water can only flow along the fixed trajectory - when a system accumulates in a certain direction to a certain extent, it will trigger a powerful "self - reinforcement." The farther you go, the greater the resistance to turn back. The more excellent you perform on the existing track, the more difficult it is to break free from the original position.

This power of "structural lock - in" can be seen everywhere in reality: Once an operating system has accumulated enough users and built a perfect application ecosystem, even if developers know that there is a more efficient system, they can only be forced to develop around it. After all, giving up the mature ecosystem to adapt to a new system means huge costs and risks. The increasingly complex data architecture in an enterprise may have deviated from the original intention of "improving efficiency" in the end, but because a single change can affect the whole, they can only keep it running reluctantly, for fear that once it stops, it will cause the collapse of the entire business.

The most terrifying thing about structural lock - in is that it will gradually wear away our patience for "long - term value" and make us increasingly unable to tolerate the state of "no short - term feedback." If you have quickly received rewards on a certain path and established a stable sense of achievement, when facing a potentially better but new path where you can't see the hope of success in the short term, your instinct will tell you that "it's not worth it."

Breaking the cocoon to "become a butterfly"

Just as a butterfly has to go through a long struggle before breaking out of the cocoon, if entrepreneurs want to break through the growth bottleneck, the key lies in breaking the shackles of the inherent thinking and unlocking the new entrepreneurial thinking suitable for the new era. It's not a complete negation of past experiences but rather a re - examination of the business logic and one's own decisions with a more open perspective, more flexible strategies, and a more long - term vision on the basis of respecting the rules.

Actively seek innovation

When training large models and algorithms, in order to break out of the "local optimum," the system will actively introduce disturbances to break out of the original trajectory. This logic also applies to life. If we want to break the habit of experience, we also need to actively "inject variables" into life: Try something completely outside your comfort zone every month and actively seek opportunities to be challenged, such as having in - depth exchanges with people in different fields, exploring new skills, or starting a side business. Deliberately break fixed habits, such as taking a different route to work, participating in unfamiliar gatherings, or sharing your views on a new platform. These small "disturbances" are the key to breaking out of the local trap and opening up new possibilities.

At each choice node, don't just care about which option offers the fastest and most certain return. Think more about: Can this step make my next choice broader and more free?

Reverse - engineer the path from the vision

Regularly update and review your goals, whether they are entrepreneurial goals or life pursuits. Reverse - engineer from the end point and then look back at your current position. Only by constantly referring to the "global map" to review your own path can you timely notice whether you're trapped on a small high - ground and mistake the local stability for the global end.

Transferable abilities

Cultivating transferable abilities is like creating a "universal key" for yourself to break path dependence. These abilities are not limited to a certain industry or position but can be flexibly reused in different scenarios, helping entrepreneurs quickly adapt to new tracks when changes occur and avoiding being passive due to the obsolescence of a single skill.

Learning ability is the core foundation of transferable abilities. Real learning ability is not about mechanically memorizing knowledge points but about mastering the method of "quickly understanding the logic of a new field and extracting core rules." System thinking ability helps entrepreneurs not view a single link in the business in isolation but analyze the relationships and impacts among various elements from the overall link. Empathy ability can help entrepreneurs quickly understand the needs and pain points of others, whether it's communicating with users, managing a team, or seeking cooperation. Second - curve thinking means starting to explore new directions when the main business is at its most successful instead of being forced to transform.

Cultivating transferable abilities doesn't mean that entrepreneurs should give up in - depth exploration in the existing field. Instead, while focusing on the present, they should consciously extract the underlying logic behind the abilities. For example, when working on a project, ask yourself more "What is the core goal of this thing? Can the method I used be reused in other scenarios?"; when learning a new skill, not only master "how to do it" but also think about "why do it this way" and "what are the underlying rules." When these transferable abilities accumulate to a certain extent, entrepreneurs will no longer be restricted by a single path. Even when facing industry changes and track switches, they can quickly gain a foothold with the flexibly reusable abilities, truly realizing the transformation from "being shaped by the path" to "actively choosing the path."

In short, we should learn to use yesterday's experience to support today and use today's problems to shape tomorrow. In this era full of uncertainties, the greatest competitive advantage may not be how many correct answers you know but how quickly you can identify and abandon those outdated old answers.

I wish you and your team to maintain a sense of direction and always be on the way.

This article is from the WeChat official account "Sequoia Capital" (ID: Sequoiacap), author: Hong Shan. It is published by 36Kr with authorization.